Integrating supportive care into the multidisciplinary management of lung cancer: we can't wait any longer.

INTRODUCTION: Due to important achievements in terms of diagnostic and therapeutic tools and the complexity of the disease itself, lung cancer management needs a multidisciplinary approach. To date, the classical multidisciplinary team involves different healthcare providers mainly dedicated to lung cancer diagnosis and treatments. Nevertheless, the underlying disease and related treatments significantly impact on patient function and psychological well-being. In this sense, supportive care may offer the best approach to relieve and manage patient symptoms and treatment-related adverse events. AREAS COVERED: Evidence reports that exercise, nutrition, smoking cessation, and psychological well-being bring many benefits in patients with lung cancer, from both a physical and socio-psychological points of view, and potentially improving their survival. Nevertheless, supportive care is rarely offered to patients, and even less frequently these needs are discussed within the multidisciplinary meeting. EXPERT OPINION: Integrating supportive care as part of the standard multidisciplinary approach for lung cancer involves a series of challenges, the first one represented by the daily necessity of specialists, such as kinesiologists, dietitians, psycho-oncologists, able to deliver a personalized approach. In the era of precision medicine, this is an essential step forward to guarantee comprehensive and patient-centered care for all patients with lung cancer.

Evaluation of nutritional status in non-small-cell lung cancer: screening, assessment and correlation with treatment outcome.

BackgroundNutritional derangements are common hallmarks of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Nevertheless, their early detection is overlooked in clinical routine. This study aimed to evaluate nutritional status and its correlation with outcome in NSCLC patients.MethodsData regarding NSCLC patients undergoing nutritional evaluation were prospectively collected (May 2016-October 2018). Nutritional risk was assessed by Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS-2002). Bilateral psoas major muscles were measured at L3 vertebrae level with routine staging-computed tomography and changes were evaluated using Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Clinico-pathological and nutritional data were correlated to progression-free/overall survival (PFS/OS) and response rate (ORR) using a Cox and logistic regression model. Kaplan-Meier curves were compared with log-rank test.ResultsThirty-eight patients were included. The majority (65.8%) of them were at nutritional risk (NRS-2002 ≥3). At multivariate analysis for patients with advanced disease, age (HR 2.44, p=0.05), performance status (HR 2.48, p=0.043) and NRS-2002 (HR 1.74, p=0.001) were significant independent predictors for PFS and weight loss (HR 1.07, p=0.008) for OS. Patients with baseline NRS-2002 <3 had significantly longer 1-year PFS (85.7% vs 19.4%, p=0.02) and higher ORR (66.7% vs 21.4%) than those with NRS-2002 ≥3. An explorative evaluation demonstrated that NRS-2002 score significantly decreased after nutritional intervention (p=0.001) for 3 months.ConclusionBaseline nutritional risk represents a prognostic factor in NSCLC. Nutritional counselling should be applied as a fundamental tool to improve nutritional risk in a short period, ameliorating patients' outcome.